Advertisements

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:20:59 +0000, measekite wrote:
> I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on
> Windows and Mac.
>
> But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>
> I am curious about now many readers today are using Gimp on Linux and
> what Linux distro and Gimp version is being used.
>
> And for these Linux users how do you manage not being able to use your
> Canon, Nikon or other software provided by the camera mfg?

I have GIMP 2.4.6 installed on my desktop Ubuntu 7.10 desktop, but in all
honesty, I don't use it very much any more. I mostly use ufraw to do what
processing I need on the raw files from my Kodak P850. We've been using
Linux exclusively for several years and have no need of the
manufacturer's software. You simply mount the camera or card reader,
transfer the data and do your thing.

Advertisements

measekite wrote:
> I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on Windows
> and Mac.
>
> But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>
> I am curious about now many readers today are using Gimp on Linux and what
> Linux distro and Gimp version is being used.
>
> And for these Linux users how do you manage not being able to use your
> Canon, Nikon or other software provided by the camera mfg?

I use Gimp on Windows(*). And so far I have had very little use for the
software which came with my various cameras.

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:20:59 GMT, measekite <>
wrote:
>I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on Windows
>and Mac.
>
>But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>
>I am curious about now many readers today are using Gimp on Linux and what
>Linux distro and Gimp version is being used.
>
>And for these Linux users how do you manage not being able to use your
>Canon, Nikon or other software provided by the camera mfg?

I'm an WindowsXP and Adobe user; Elements 5.0 for photographs that
don't require more than simple cropping and maybe a touch of the
healing brush, and Photoshop 7.0 for photographs that need more
complex adjustments.

I have never found software provided by the camera manufacturer to be
of any use at all.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 11:34:35 -0800, John Navas
<> wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:20:59 GMT, measekite <> wrote
>in <vev5l.6882$>:
>
>>I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on Windows
>>and Mac.
>
>It's good, but there are other good ones as well. Much depends on what
>you need and want to do, and on how experienced you are.
>
>>But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>
>It can, and also on Windows.
>
>I don't normally use GIMP because (1) I don't like the interface and (2)
>it doesn't do as well as Photoshop on some things I need to do, although
>that is probably in part a function of my being more comfortable with
>Photoshop.

"Comfort zone" is more important than it is given credit. I started
with Photoshop and Elements in early versions, and find the interface
to be very simple to work with. There are other programs that
probably offer features that I'd like, but it's always easier for me
to figure out how to do something in an Adobe product rather than
learning some new program.

Somewhere, someone mentioned some program where the Channel Mixing
automatically balanced (Photoshop's does not). I think I'd like that,
but not enough to bother with a whole new program.

measekite wrote:
> I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on
> Windows and Mac.
>
> But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>
> I am curious about now many readers today are using Gimp on Linux and
> what Linux distro and Gimp version is being used.
>
> And for these Linux users how do you manage not being able to use your
> Canon, Nikon or other software provided by the camera mfg?

I tried GIMP and could not stand the interface. Paint Shop Pro 10 does
almost everything I need, and I also use PIE for basic sorting, and
Autopano Pro for automated panorama generation. None of these programs
runs natively on Linux. I do have a UNIX system here, but it's FreeBSD,
and not Linux. I don't think I have ever used the camera-maker's
software.

I'm working exclusively on linux at home. For test purposes I've
installed the canon DPP. It runs quite well with wine here. I still have
to try a bit more with raw (I have my new camera since 13.12.2008), so
my desicion about ufraw or dpp is not done, but at least i have the
choice

On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 05:26:09 -0600, Neil Ellwood wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:20:59 +0000, measekite wrote:
>
>> I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on
>> Windows and Mac.
>>
>> But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>>
>> I am curious about now many readers today are using Gimp on Linux and
>> what Linux distro and Gimp version is being used.
>>
>> And for these Linux users how do you manage not being able to use your
>> Canon, Nikon or other software provided by the camera mfg?
>
> Gimp 2-4-7 on Debian 'Lenny' with the addition of Hugin for the rare
> occasions needed. Rawstudio deals with initial conversion of photos from
> camera. I have no need for any Canon software as the only windows I have
> are built into my house.

For very simple panoramas you might try the pandora plug-in for GIMP, if
you haven't already. It is limited, but extremely simple and seems to
produce decent results very quickly.

"ray" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:20:59 +0000, measekite wrote:
>
>> I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on
>> Windows and Mac.
>>
>> But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>>
>> I am curious about now many readers today are using Gimp on Linux and
>> what Linux distro and Gimp version is being used.
>>
>> And for these Linux users how do you manage not being able to use your
>> Canon, Nikon or other software provided by the camera mfg?
>
> I have GIMP 2.4.6 installed on my desktop Ubuntu 7.10 desktop, but in all
> honesty, I don't use it very much any more. I mostly use ufraw to do what
> processing I need on the raw files from my Kodak P850. We've been using
> Linux exclusively for several years and have no need of the
> manufacturer's software. You simply mount the camera or card reader,
> transfer the data and do your thing.

Many people extole the virtues of Gimp... Or Photo Paint or few other image
processing apps... Until one day they experience a Pro's computer set up for
Photoshop.

Likewise plenty of people rave about Linux until they get to use a quad core
Windows machine with a really fast graphics card and discover their linux
gear is antique when it comes to handling graphics.

The same could be said for PC users who experience the raw processing power
of Photoshop on a MAC. Those who rave about how good their P&S camera is,
probably have never and will never experience a 3D or 1D.

What I'm trying to to say is that we all tend to warm to the familiar. Once,
I was ultra faithful to Corel Photo Paint. Then a friend lent me his PC with
Photoshop and I've been a PS kinda guy ever since. One day I went to work
for an agency running Mac's exclusively and now I use a Mac for all my
graphic work but I still use a PC for daily office stuff.

Each application of worth (and Gimp has worth) has it's own sweet spot.
Every OS has an area of operation where it is better than the rest and each
platform has it's own sweet spot too. Why can we not recognize this and
discuss the merits of the subject instead of getting into a pissing
competition about which is best?

John Navas wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 10:13:51 -1100, "D.Mac" <>
> wrote in <gj8q97$35c$>:
>
>> "ray" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:20:59 +0000, measekite wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on
>>>> Windows and Mac.
>>>>
>>>> But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>>>>
>>>> I am curious about now many readers today are using Gimp on Linux and
>>>> what Linux distro and Gimp version is being used.
>>>>
>>>> And for these Linux users how do you manage not being able to use your
>>>> Canon, Nikon or other software provided by the camera mfg?
>>> I have GIMP 2.4.6 installed on my desktop Ubuntu 7.10 desktop, but in all
>>> honesty, I don't use it very much any more. I mostly use ufraw to do what
>>> processing I need on the raw files from my Kodak P850. We've been using
>>> Linux exclusively for several years and have no need of the
>>> manufacturer's software. You simply mount the camera or card reader,
>>> transfer the data and do your thing.
>> Many people extole the virtues of Gimp... Or Photo Paint or few other image
>> processing apps... Until one day they experience a Pro's computer set up for
>> Photoshop.
>>
>> Likewise plenty of people rave about Linux until they get to use a quad core
>> Windows machine with a really fast graphics card and discover their linux
>> gear is antique when it comes to handling graphics.
>>
>> The same could be said for PC users who experience the raw processing power
>> of Photoshop on a MAC. Those who rave about how good their P&S camera is,
>> probably have never and will never experience a 3D or 1D.
>>
>> What I'm trying to to say is that we all tend to warm to the familiar. Once,
>> I was ultra faithful to Corel Photo Paint. Then a friend lent me his PC with
>> Photoshop and I've been a PS kinda guy ever since. One day I went to work
>> for an agency running Mac's exclusively and now I use a Mac for all my
>> graphic work but I still use a PC for daily office stuff.
>>
>> Each application of worth (and Gimp has worth) has it's own sweet spot.
>> Every OS has an area of operation where it is better than the rest and each
>> platform has it's own sweet spot too. Why can we not recognize this and
>> discuss the merits of the subject instead of getting into a pissing
>> competition about which is best?
>
> Your post itself is a big part of the reason. It reflects your own
> biases, presenting them as fact, which just fans the flames. There are
> many of us with as much perspective that don't share your point of view.
>
Oh dear, I hope he doesn't come across someone with a Rolls or Bentley,
that old clunker he drives will never feel the same.
When people extol the virtues of full PS over everything else they
should bear in mind the very considerable difference in cost between
that and PSP or PS Elements.
Dave Cohen

On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 10:13:51 -1100, D.Mac wrote:
> "ray" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 19:20:59 +0000, measekite wrote:
>>
>>> I know that Photoshop is the best image editor and runs mostly on
>>> Windows and Mac.
>>>
>>> But Gimp on Linux can also do a lot.
>>>
>>> I am curious about now many readers today are using Gimp on Linux and
>>> what Linux distro and Gimp version is being used.
>>>
>>> And for these Linux users how do you manage not being able to use your
>>> Canon, Nikon or other software provided by the camera mfg?
>>
>> I have GIMP 2.4.6 installed on my desktop Ubuntu 7.10 desktop, but in
>> all honesty, I don't use it very much any more. I mostly use ufraw to
>> do what processing I need on the raw files from my Kodak P850. We've
>> been using Linux exclusively for several years and have no need of the
>> manufacturer's software. You simply mount the camera or card reader,
>> transfer the data and do your thing.
>
> Many people extole the virtues of Gimp... Or Photo Paint or few other
> image processing apps... Until one day they experience a Pro's computer
> set up for Photoshop.

1) - I'm not a pro.
2) - adobe does not sell a Linux version. When they offer one, I'll be
happy to check it out.
>
> Likewise plenty of people rave about Linux until they get to use a quad
> core Windows machine with a really fast graphics card and discover their
> linux gear is antique when it comes to handling graphics.

I have found that on the same or very similar equipment, Linux runs
circles around MS. It is certainly much more secure and more stable. I
find that I can handle all the graphics I have a desire to handle. I'm
not into making full frame movies or anything of that sort.
>
> The same could be said for PC users who experience the raw processing
> power of Photoshop on a MAC. Those who rave about how good their P&S
> camera is, probably have never and will never experience a 3D or 1D.

adobe does not offer photoshop for Linux, again, when they do, I'll be
happy to check it out.
>
> What I'm trying to to say is that we all tend to warm to the familiar.
> Once, I was ultra faithful to Corel Photo Paint. Then a friend lent me
> his PC with Photoshop and I've been a PS kinda guy ever since. One day I
> went to work for an agency running Mac's exclusively and now I use a Mac
> for all my graphic work but I still use a PC for daily office stuff.

But you were just raving about the superiority of MS for handling
graphics chores - I detect a little inconsistency.
>
> Each application of worth (and Gimp has worth) has it's own sweet spot.
> Every OS has an area of operation where it is better than the rest and
> each platform has it's own sweet spot too. Why can we not recognize this
> and discuss the merits of the subject instead of getting into a pissing
> competition about which is best?

I don't recall starting a 'pissing competition' - I merely indicated I
used GIMP and Linux. The namecalling and pissing started with your post!

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:10:34 -0800, John Navas wrote:
> On 29 Dec 2008 18:01:35 GMT, ray <> wrote in
> <>:
>
>>On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 10:13:51 -1100, D.Mac wrote:
>
>>> Likewise plenty of people rave about Linux until they get to use a
>>> quad core Windows machine with a really fast graphics card and
>>> discover their linux gear is antique when it comes to handling
>>> graphics.
>>
>>I have found that on the same or very similar equipment, Linux runs
>>circles around MS. It is certainly much more secure and more stable. ...
>
> Then there's something seriously wrong with your computer.
>
> Linux advocacy does not belong here in any event.

Merely replying to the previous imbecile. And now I have to reply to
another one!

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:10:34 -0800, John Navas wrote:
> On 29 Dec 2008 18:01:35 GMT, ray <> wrote in
> <>:
>
>>On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 10:13:51 -1100, D.Mac wrote:
>
>>> Likewise plenty of people rave about Linux until they get to use a
>>> quad core Windows machine with a really fast graphics card and
>>> discover their linux gear is antique when it comes to handling
>>> graphics.
>>
>>I have found that on the same or very similar equipment, Linux runs
>>circles around MS. It is certainly much more secure and more stable. ...
>
> Then there's something seriously wrong with your computer.

Nothing wrong at all - I keep them in good running order.
>
> Linux advocacy does not belong here in any event.

I see. So it is perfectly fine for d.mac to slam Linux (as well as
yourself) and tell us how great mac and ms are, but totally out of line
for me to take the opposite view.

I believe that is called a 'double standard' - you've showed us yours.

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 14:49:09 -0800, John Navas wrote:
> On 29 Dec 2008 22:44:47 GMT, ray <> wrote in
> <>:
>
>>On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:10:34 -0800, John Navas wrote:
>>
>>> On 29 Dec 2008 18:01:35 GMT, ray <> wrote in
>>> <>:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 10:13:51 -1100, D.Mac wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Likewise plenty of people rave about Linux until they get to use a
>>>>> quad core Windows machine with a really fast graphics card and
>>>>> discover their linux gear is antique when it comes to handling
>>>>> graphics.
>>>>
>>>>I have found that on the same or very similar equipment, Linux runs
>>>>circles around MS. It is certainly much more secure and more stable.
>>>>...
>>>
>>> Then there's something seriously wrong with your computer.
>>
>>Nothing wrong at all - I keep them in good running order.
>
> Then we must have much different definitions of "good running order".
>
>>> Linux advocacy does not belong here in any event.
>>
>>I see. So it is perfectly fine for d.mac to slam Linux (as well as
>>yourself) and tell us how great mac and ms are, but totally out of line
>>for me to take the opposite view.
>
> D.Mac was likewise out of line.
> There was no slamming of Linux by me.

Well, you're wrong. By all the recent benchmarks. Linux runs quite well
on hardware that will not even support vista and in some cases xp. Since
I've been a computer professional for over 30 years, I know something
about keeping my hardware up to snuff.

>
>>>>I believe that is called a 'double standard' - you've showed us yours.
>>>
>>> Hardly. I'm opposed to all advocacy.
>>
>>Certainly you are, that's why you chastised me, but not dmac.
>
> And you're taking that personally.

Yes, as a matter of fact, I am.
>
>>But that's fine, I have you pegged now.
>
> Whatever.

Share This Page

Welcome to Velocity Reviews!

Welcome to the Velocity Reviews, the place to come for the latest tech news and reviews.

Please join our friendly community by clicking the button below - it only takes a few seconds and is totally free. You'll be able to chat with other enthusiasts and get tech help from other members.
Sign up now!